| Submit your comments on this article |
| Syria-Lebanon-Iran |
| Iran Warns U.N. Agency Against Referral |
| 2005-09-18 |
| Iran struck a strident note Sunday on the eve of a meeting with the U.N. nuclear agency, warning that referring Tehran to the U.N. Security Council could lead it to expand work on a program that can make nuclear fuel — or weapons grade uranium. Foreign Minister spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said Iran was not yet contemplating uranium enrichment but warned that it may change its mind if the country is hauled before the U.N.'s top decision-making body to answer questions about its suspect nuclear activities. "Enrichment is not on the agenda for the time being but if the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) meeting on Monday leads to radical results, we will make our decision to correspond to that," he said. A European official said the Security Council option remained on the table, suggesting much of it depended on whether the European Union and the United States were successful in eroding the resistance of council member Russia to such action. She said that senior representatives of the European Union, the United States and Russia would meet Monday in New York to explore common ground. Results would determine whether the Europeans and Americans would push for immediate Security Council action or settle for something less during the IAEA board of governors' meeting in Vienna, the official told The Associated Press. Washington and the European Union began lobbying for Security Council referral last month after Iran resumed uranium conversion, a precursor to uranium enrichment, which can produce both fuel for energy or the core of nuclear weapons. Ignoring their demand for a renewed conversion freeze, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad proclaimed his country's "inalienable right" to produce nuclear fuel in a speech Saturday to the U.N. General Assembly. Russian President Vladimir Putin refused to be pinned down ahead of Monday's negotiations. "Today, the Iranian side is working sufficiently in cooperation with (the) IAEA ... so let's proceed from the circumstances of today," Putin told Fox News Sunday, suggesting he was leaning against Security Council involvement. Still, he added that Moscow stands ready "to coordinate our activities, both with American and European partners, and I must say that our positions here are quite close." Diplomats accredited to the IAEA, meanwhile, suggested Iran may have another card up its sleeve, saying it may offer new concessions during the board meeting to take deflect the Security Council threat. The diplomats, who are familiar with the Iran file, told the AP that Tehran may announce that is ready to grant agency experts access to high-ranking military officials or military sites. The agency has been trying to determine if gaps in Iranian reporting on more than 18 years of clandestine nuclear activity first revealed three years ago are attempts to cover up military involvement in what Iran insists is a purely civilian program meant only to generate power. Establishing such involvement would bolster arguments by the United States and its allies that Iran's program is a cover for trying to make nuclear arms. The IAEA has been rebuffed in attempts to revisit Parchin, the site of alleged experiments linked to nuclear weapons and to inspect Lavizan-Shian, the possible site for equipment that can be used both for peaceful and nuclear weapons-related purposes. Additionally, the agency has been denied permission to interview senior officials linked to the military. With the board already closely divided on whether to haul Iran before the Security Council, any new concessions by Iran could increase the number of countries opposed and leave the Europeans and the Americans in the minority, said the diplomats. They, like the European official, demanded anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. |
| Posted by:ed |
| #3 The entire sequence of events, an unbroken string missteps really, since the revelation of the Iranian nuke program has been surreal. It would be laughable - and panned, were it published as fiction. The "you just can't make this stuff up" thought has hit with almost every story - going back at least to mid 2003. Once revealed, in August, 2002 by the "terrorist" org MKO (anti-Shah when founded, anti_Mullahs now), this Dec, 2001, article suddenly made real-world sense - not just the usual Islamic bravado and breast-beating we were accustomed to out of PaleoLand. To be here, at this point, in this situation, just boggles. If there were two sane neurons to rub together in the entire pile of Black Hats and their minions, they would've kept below the radar. No one would've taken seriously the first reports of their nuke program if they had been cool, smart, cagey. But nope, they just couldn't contain themselves and lie low, they had to bray and bellow. Nukes are Islamic Viagra - or Cialis, if you prefer. Mad Mullahs. Never has a derogatory slur proven to be more accurate. Moron Mullahs would be true, too, but miss the vital element that makes these assholes uniquely dangerous: they are well and truly insane. |
| Posted by: .com 2005-09-18 22:39 |
| #2 If they do get the bomb, I hope they do test it (on their own territory). That in itself will put an end to the UN, IAEA, EIEIO, and any other vowel agencies thought up by the UN. It will have the added effect of putting egg on the EU's face, dragging them into irrelevance (assuming they haven't already accepted the inevitability that tyrannical regimes, such as in Iran, will get the bomb sooner or later). If Iran gets the bomb, would it still matter anymore what the EU/UN says? |
| Posted by: Rafael 2005-09-18 22:20 |
| #1 Foreign Minister spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said Iran was not yet contemplating uranium enrichment but warned that it may change its mind if the country is hauled before the U.N.'s top decision-making body to answer questions about its suspect nuclear activities. "If you tell us not to do it, we'll do it." Yeah, like they really care what anyone thinks. I'm betting they'll test something -- possibly inside another country -- before the end of 2006. |
| Posted by: Robert Crawford 2005-09-18 21:47 |